Preview (9 of 27 pages)

Preview Extract

Chapter 26 Alliances, War, and a Troubled Peace MULTIPLE CHOICE 1. The Triple Alliance forged by Bismarck consisted of ____________. A. Germany, Austria, and Italy B. Germany, France, and Britain C. Italy, Germany, and Spain D. Austria, Germany, and Poland Answer: A 2. William II wanted ____________. A. to forge alliances with Russia and France B. to become more isolated C. a navy and colonies like Britain’s D. to expand the German Empire by gaining territory Answer: C 3. At the Congress of Berlin in 1878, ____________. A. Germany claimed a new role on the world stage B. Russia was permitted to occupy Constantinople C. Bosnia-Herzegovina became an independent state D. the Ottoman Empire was dismembered Answer: A 4. The first power to mobilize against Russia in 1914 was ____________. A. Austria B. France C. Germany D. Serbia Answer: A 5. Which of the following was one of the demands made by Austria-Hungary to Serbia after the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand? A. the formation of a military alliance with Austria-Hungary B. the elimination of anti-Austro-Hungarian materials in Serbian schools C. the suppression of Allied propaganda D. annexation into the Dual Monarchy Answer: B 6. Which nation had the largest number of soldiers potentially available in World War I? A. Great Britain B. the United States C. Russia D. Germany Answer: D 7. According to the Schlieffen Plan of 1905, which of the following was supposed to happen? A. German troops would move west quickly to defeat France and then move to the eastern front. B. French troops would move to conquer German troops and then move east to assist the Russians. C. German troops would move east to defeat France and then move to the Russian front. D. French troops would move to conquer German troops and then move west to assist the Russians. Answer: A 8. Colonel T. E. Lawrence played a key role in the war in ____________. A. the Middle East B. France C. West Africa D. Greece Answer: A 9. The British introduced the use of ____________ in World War I. A. poison gas B. the tank C. trench warfare D. submarine warfare Answer: B 10. The Second Morocco Crisis brought Britain closer to ____________. A. Belgium B. Russia C. France D. Italy Answer: C 11. Who was Rasputin? A. the tsar B. a Russian nobleman who helped the tsar abdicate C. a faith healer who advised the tsar D. an aide to V. I. Lenin Answer: C 12. Leon Trotsky’s military forces were opposed by the ____________. A. Red Army B. Cheka C. Black Russians D. White Russians Answer: D 13. The civil war between the Red Russians and White Russians ended in ____________. A. 1921, when the Red Army finally overcame the domestic opposition B. March 1918, with the acceptance of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk C. December 1917, when Russia signed an armistice with Germany D. 1921, when the Red Russians conceded defeat and signed a peace treaty with the White Russians Answer: A 14. In March 1918, the last German offensive was stopped at ____________. A. Lorraine B. Normandy C. the Marne D. Alsace Answer: C 15. The battle casualties of World War I on all sides came to about ____________. A. 10 million dead and 15 million wounded B. 15 million dead and 10 million wounded C. 10 million dead and 20 million wounded D. 20 million dead and 15 million wounded Answer: C 16. Mainly due to the British forces, by October 30, 1918, ____________ was out of the war. A. Palestine B. Turkey C. Iraq D. Iran Answer: B 17. The peace treaty signed in Paris in 1920 between Turkey and the Allies dismembered ____________. A. the Ottoman Empire B. the Byzantine Empire C. the Austro-Hungarian Empire D. Italy Answer: A 18. A Greek invasion of the Turkish homeland provoked a nationalist reaction, bringing the young general Mustafa Kemal, or the ____________, to power. A. “Prince of Nationalism” B. “General of Freedom” C. “Protector of the People” D. “Father of the Turks” Answer: D 19. The Big Four were ____________. A. the United States, Britain, France, and Italy B. the United States, Britain, Germany, and Japan C. the United States, Russia, France, and Germany D. the United States, Japan, France, and Italy Answer: A 20. In the peace talks that ended World War I, Germany ____________. A. was forced to accept terms dictated by the victors B. negotiated a few minor concessions C. negotiated several major concessions D. retained the right to station troops west of the Rhine River Answer: A 21. World War I ____________. A. did little to eliminate colonialism B. brought about the rapid elimination of colonialism C. led the United States to seek new colonies D. led to a prohibition on the creation of new colonies by European nations Answer: A 22. At the Versailles peace talks, Germany signed a treaty ____________. A. accepting blame for World War I B. dividing the country into two separate nations: East Germany and West Germany C. requiring Germany to weaken itself militarily D. requiring Germany to join the League of Nations Answer: A 23. What countries were expected to be barriers to the westward expansion of Russian communism? A. Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine B. Turkey, Iraq, and Yugoslavia C. Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia, the Baltic states, and Czechoslovakia D. Poland, Romania, Turkey, and Iraq Answer: C 24. Most of Poland was carved out of the former ____________. A. Austro-Hungarian Empire B. Russian Empire C. Ottoman Empire D. German Empire Answer: B 25. Mandates established in the former Ottoman Empire were administered by ____________. A. France and Britain B. Italy and Britain C. Russia, France, and Britain D. the United States, France, and Britain Answer: A 26. Germany and Austria made a secret treaty in 1879 in which they agreed they would ____________. A. remain neutral in each other’s affairs B. not attack each other C. provide military assistance to each other if Russia attacked either of them D. provide military assistance to each other if any country attacked them Answer: C 27. The formation of the Triple Entente is best seen in light of the ____________. A. alliance between France and Russia B. German alliance with Russia C. creation of the Triple Alliance D. end of the Habsburg Empire Answer: C 28. Rivalry in the Balkans became an international conflict when ____________. A. Germany attempted to annex Bosnia and Herzegovina B. Slavs in Bosnia and Herzegovina revolted against Turkish rule C. Serbia and Montenegro assisted the Slavs in the revolt against Turkish rule D. Russia became involved in the Slav revolt against Turkish rule Answer: D 29. The Pan-Slavic movement sought to ____________. A. unite all Slavs under the protection of Russia B. gain independence for Bosnia and Herzegovina C. gain independence for Serbia and Montenegro D. unite all Slavs in an independent state Answer: A 30. Which phrase best characterizes Bismarck’s view of Germany’s relationship with France during the early 1870s? A. mutually beneficial B. damage control C. friendly D. openly antagonistic Answer: B 31. What motivated Russia and France to form an alliance? A. Germany had been too successful in isolating both countries diplomatically. B. Russia wanted to strengthen its political power so it could attack Germany, and France wanted to weaken Germany’s influence so it could form alliances with other countries. C. Russia wanted the troops France could supply, and France wanted the security against Germany Russia could provide. D. Each country feared the other would form an alliance with Germany. Answer: A 32. The diplomatic policies of General Leo von Caprivi and William II resulted in ____________. A. Germany becoming an enemy of Britain B. Germany and Britain drawing closer C. Germany and France drawing closer D. Germany becoming isolated from the rest of Europe Answer: A 33. Germany’s real goal in fomenting the First Moroccan Crisis was ____________. A. gaining a Mediterranean port B. testing out new military technology C. reconciling differences with France D. testing international relations Answer: D 34. During the last three decades of the nineteenth century, ____________ chose to be isolated, but _____________ was intentionally isolated by other European powers. A. Britain; Russia B. Germany: France C. France; Russia D. Britain; France Answer: D 35. Which of the following events are in the correct chronological order? A. Russo-Japanese War, Congress of Berlin, Russo-Turkish War, and First and Second Balkan Wars B. Congress of Berlin, Russo-Japanese War, Russo-Turkish War, and First and Second Balkan Wars C. Russo-Turkish War, Russo-Japanese War, Congress of Berlin, and First and Second Balkan Wars D. Russo-Turkish War, Congress of Berlin, Russo-Japanese War, and First and Second Balkan Wars Answer: D 36. The Balkan crises threatened what two empires? A. Austrian and Ottoman B. Russian and Austrian C. British and Ottoman D. French and British Answer: A 37. Why did the United States enter World War I in 1917? A. The Germans attacked Cuba. B. The Germans started sinking U.S. ships again. C. The Germans bombed Rhode Island. D. The Germans sank the Lusitania. Answer: B 38. Following the tsar’s abdication, Russia’s parliament ____________. A. formed a provisional government with Western sympathies B. dissolved C. formed a provisional government with socialist leanings D. formed a provisional government with German sympathies Answer: A 39. Initially, the Soviets ____________. A. supported the provisional government B. plotted to overthrow the provisional government C. allowed the provisional government to function without actually supporting it D. believed they could persuade the provisional government to accept its demands Answer: C 40. A main reason for popular discontent with the Russian provisional government in 1917–1918 was ____________. A. Kerensky’s decision not to aggressively continue the war B. the resistance of embittered monarchists to a socialist premier C. widespread demands for the Bolsheviks to lead the country D. continuing shortages of food Answer: D 41. The Mensheviks eventually rejected the Russian provisional government because it ____________. A. failed to formalize a permanent government B. ordered the army to fire on demonstrators C. failed to control the army and purge reactionaries from the government D. banned worker collectives, or councils Answer: C 42. Bolshevik Russia agreed to the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, under which they ____________. A. gained the Baltic States B. received large amounts of money for reparations C. agreed to end the civil war D. yielded Finland, Poland, and Ukraine to Germany Answer: D 43. The success of the Bolshevik coup of November 6 was surprising, given the group’s ____________. A. small size B. association with the tsarist government C. criminal status D. decline in the early 1910s Answer: A 44. Why did the Bolsheviks oppose World War I? A. They believed it benefited only capitalism. B. They considered it an obstacle to their revolutionary ambitions. C. They considered military aggression antithetical to socialist beliefs. D. They feared a Germany victory. Answer: A 45. The Ludendorff offensive is best characterized as a ____________. A. desperate risk B. reasonable strategy C. long-established plan D. necessity Answer: A 46. The Germans controlled Eastern Europe and its resources, especially food, and by 1918 were free to concentrate their forces on the western front. These developments would probably have been decisive without ____________. A. the Italian allies’ support B. American intervention C. British invasion in northern France D. widespread mutinies in the German ranks Answer: B 47. Which of the following eventually brought about the end of the Ottoman Empire? A. its neutrality at the outbreak of World War I B. its decision to enter the war on the side of Germany in 1914 C. its decision to enter the war on the side of the Allies in 1914 D. its refusal to participate in the peace settlement in Paris Answer: B 48. The covenant of the League of Nations sought to establish ____________. A. one world government B. the elimination of barriers to free trade C. international bans on the production of machine guns, tanks, and submarines D. a system for resolving international conflicts Answer: D 49. The exclusion of the native colonial leaders of Africa and Asia in the peace settlement discussions strengthened ____________. A. anticolonialism B. dependence on European powers C. European colonial powers D. international relations Answer: A 50. Which of the following disputes Keynes’s criticism of the Treaty of Versailles? A. The Germans recovered prosperity following the peace treaty. B. The Germans’ plans for a European settlement would have been much harsher than the Treaty of Versailles. C. The Allies were unanimous in determining the terms of the treaty. D. The Arab world maintained a stable, if shaky, peace. Answer: A 51. What best characterizes the Serbian reply to Austria-Hungary’s demands? A. conciliatory B. militaristic C. jingoistic D. mobilization Answer: A 52. The German strategy of fomenting trouble in Russia by returning Lenin from exile can be considered ____________. A. partially successful B. entirely successful C. a complete failure D. a partial failure Answer: B 53. The March Revolution in Russia, compared to that of November of the same year, was ____________. A. spontaneous B. bloody C. wider in scope D. more influenced by Marxist rhetoric Answer: A 54. World War I had what impact on colonization? A. It led directly to decolonization. B. It completed the process of decolonization. C. It initiated new attitudes that would eventually bring about decolonization. D. It confirmed ties between colonies and colonizers. Answer: C 55. The one real strength of the League of Nations was that ____________. A. it had both persuasive and coercive powers B. there was a consensus about its principles C. it included all European nations and the U.S. D. it was opposed to colonialism Answer: B SHORT ANSWER 56. William II believed that dismissing Bismarck in 1890 would help him secure Germany’s deserved “place in the ____________.” Answer: sun 57. General Leo von Caprivi’s and William II’s new alliance system ____________ the risk of war. Answer: increased 58. In 1911, Germany responded to a French intervention in Morocco by sending a warship, the Panther, to the Moroccan port of ____________. Answer: Agadir 59. If Germany had not invaded ____________, British public opinion might have continued to favor neutrality. Answer: Belgium 60. Any kind of ____________ was generally understood to be equivalent to an act of war. Answer: mobilization 61. The Russian Socialist parties organized workers into ____________, or councils. Answer: soviets 62. The Red Army was led by ____________. Answer: Trotsky 63. The tsar and his family were murdered by ____________. Answer: the Bolsheviks 64. The two countries that became administrators of mandates carved out of the former Ottoman Empire were ____________. Answer: France and Britain 65. Woodrow Wilson called America’s war aims the ____________. Answer: Fourteen Points 66. The collapse of Russia and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk were the zenith of ____________ success. Answer: German 67. The disintegration of the German army forced ____________ to abdicate on November 9, 1918. Answer: William II 68. The pro-German ____________ overthrew the Ottoman government and had control of the government in 1909. Answer: Young Turks 69. The notion of “a peace without ____________” became a mockery when the Soviet Union and Germany were excluded from the peace conference. Answer: victors 70. The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes was also known as ____________. Answer: Yugoslavia ESSAY 71. What was Bismarck’s plan for ensuring German power and security on the European continent? How did world events and German actions after 1900 upend the European equilibrium that Bismarck had tried to maintain? Answer: Bismarck's plan for ensuring German power and security on the European continent was centered around the concept of Realpolitik, which aimed to maintain a balance of power in Europe and prevent the emergence of a hostile coalition against Germany. Bismarck achieved this through a series of diplomatic maneuvers and alliances, most notably the formation of the Three Emperors' League with Austria-Hungary and Russia, and later the creation of the Dual Alliance with Austria-Hungary. These alliances were designed to isolate France and prevent it from seeking revenge for its defeat in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71. However, after Bismarck's dismissal in 1890, German actions and world events began to upend the European equilibrium he had sought to maintain. Kaiser Wilhelm II's aggressive and expansionist policies, including the dismissal of Bismarck and the failure to renew the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia, undermined Germany's diplomatic relationships and destabilized the balance of power in Europe. Germany's pursuit of a large navy and its assertive stance in international affairs, such as the Moroccan Crisis of 1905-06, further alienated potential allies and contributed to the formation of rival blocs in Europe. Moreover, the rise of other great powers, such as the United Kingdom, France, and Russia, as well as the emergence of new alliances, such as the Entente Cordiale between France and the United Kingdom, and the Triple Entente between France, Russia, and the United Kingdom, challenged Germany's position and eroded its security. By the early 20th century, Europe had become divided into two hostile alliance systems, with Germany increasingly isolated and surrounded by potential adversaries. Overall, German actions and world events after 1900, including Kaiser Wilhelm II's policies and the shifting balance of power in Europe, upended the equilibrium that Bismarck had tried to maintain, leading to increased tensions and rivalries that ultimately contributed to the outbreak of World War I. 72. What role did the formation of alliances play in the cause of World War I? How do you think World War I would have differed if the alliance system were not in play? Explain. Answer: The formation of alliances played a central role in the cause of World War I by creating a complex web of interlocking commitments and obligations that turned a localized conflict into a continental and eventually global war. The system of alliances, characterized by the Triple Entente (France, Russia, and the United Kingdom) and the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy), heightened tensions and exacerbated existing rivalries between European powers. The alliance system contributed to the outbreak of war by providing a mechanism for the rapid escalation of conflicts and limiting diplomatic options for resolving disputes. When the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary in 1914 sparked a crisis in the Balkans, the existing alliances compelled countries to honor their commitments and support their allies, regardless of the merits of the case or the consequences of war. Without the alliance system in play, World War I would likely have been averted or contained to a localized conflict in the Balkans. Without the entangling alliances that bound countries together in mutual defense, there would have been greater flexibility for diplomatic negotiations and mediation to resolve disputes and prevent the outbreak of war. Furthermore, without the rigid alliance commitments that obligated countries to support their allies unconditionally, there would have been fewer incentives for countries to escalate conflicts into full-scale war. However, it is also possible that without the alliance system, conflicts between individual states could have escalated into larger conflicts as countries pursued their own national interests without regard for the consequences. Additionally, the absence of formal alliances could have created a more unstable and unpredictable international environment, making diplomatic relations more volatile and prone to miscalculations and misunderstandings. Overall, while the alliance system played a key role in causing World War I by exacerbating tensions and facilitating the rapid escalation of conflicts, it is difficult to predict how the war would have differed without the presence of alliances, as other factors such as nationalism, militarism, and imperialism also contributed to the outbreak of war. 73. Why did Bethmann-Hollweg decide to lead Germany into war in 1914? Analyze how specific crises and events in the years leading up to the war shaped German decision-making. How much of the decision to go to war was the result of earlier German preparations for war? Answer: Bethmann-Hollweg's decision to lead Germany into war in 1914 was influenced by a combination of factors, including perceived strategic imperatives, diplomatic considerations, and domestic political pressures. One key factor was Germany's geopolitical position and strategic calculations regarding the balance of power in Europe. German leaders feared encirclement by hostile alliances and believed that a preemptive strike might be necessary to secure Germany's security and dominance on the continent. Additionally, the July Crisis of 1914, triggered by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary, created a sense of urgency and perceived threat to German interests, leading to calls for decisive action to protect Austria-Hungary and preserve Germany's credibility as a great power. Furthermore, German decision-making was shaped by domestic political dynamics, including the influence of military leaders and nationalist factions who advocated for a more assertive and aggressive foreign policy. Bethmann-Hollweg faced pressure from elements within the German military and political establishment to support Austria-Hungary and confront the perceived threats posed by Russia and France. However, it is important to note that the decision to go to war in 1914 was not predetermined but the result of a series of contingent events and choices made by German leaders in response to specific crises and circumstances. While Germany had made preparations for war, including military build-ups and strategic planning, the decision to mobilize and declare war was not inevitable and could have been avoided through diplomatic negotiations and de-escalation. Overall, Bethmann-Hollweg's decision to lead Germany into war in 1914 was influenced by a complex array of factors, including strategic calculations, diplomatic pressures, and domestic political considerations. While German preparations for war certainly played a role in shaping decision-making, the outbreak of war was ultimately the result of a confluence of events and choices made by multiple actors in response to specific crises and contingencies. 74. Why were the opposing forces of World War I locked in a virtual stalemate until 1917? What broke the stalemate? Answer: The opposing forces of World War I were locked in a virtual stalemate until 1917 due to a combination of factors, including trench warfare, technological advancements, and strategic impasses. Trench warfare, characterized by fortified defensive positions and elaborate systems of trenches, barbed wire, and machine guns, made it difficult for either side to achieve significant breakthroughs or gain significant territory. The defensive nature of trench warfare resulted in high casualties and minimal gains, leading to a deadlock on the Western Front. Technological advancements such as artillery, machine guns, and poison gas further reinforced the stalemate by increasing the lethality and effectiveness of defensive positions, making it difficult for attacking forces to advance or gain ground. Moreover, the absence of effective tactics or strategies to overcome entrenched defenses contributed to the continuation of the stalemate. Strategically, both sides were evenly matched in terms of manpower, resources, and industrial capacity, leading to a balance of power that prevented either side from gaining a decisive advantage. The failure of large-scale offensives, such as the Battle of the Somme and the Battle of Verdun, to achieve significant breakthroughs further reinforced the perception of a stalemate. The stalemate was broken in 1917 by several key developments. The entry of the United States into the war provided the Allies with fresh troops, resources, and industrial capacity, tipping the balance of power in their favor. Additionally, the collapse of Russia following the Russian Revolution of 1917 freed up German forces from the Eastern Front, allowing them to concentrate their efforts on the Western Front. Furthermore, technological innovations such as the introduction of tanks and improved artillery tactics helped to overcome entrenched defenses and break through enemy lines. The Hundred Days Offensive in 1918, launched by the Allies with the support of tanks and air power, finally broke the stalemate and led to the collapse of the Central Powers. Overall, the stalemate in World War I was broken by a combination of factors, including the entry of the United States, the collapse of Russia, technological innovations, and strategic offensives by the Allies, which ultimately tipped the balance of power in their favor and led to victory. 75. What were the most important factors that enabled the Bolsheviks to seize power? In your opinion, could power have been attained in a different, perhaps more peaceful, manner? Why or why not? Explain. Answer: The most important factors that enabled the Bolsheviks to seize power were a combination of political, social, and military developments, including widespread discontent with the Provisional Government, the Bolsheviks' revolutionary ideology and organizational capacity, and the support of key constituencies such as workers, soldiers, and peasants. The Bolsheviks capitalized on popular dissatisfaction with the Provisional Government's handling of the war, economic hardships, and social unrest by promising "Peace, Land, and Bread" and advocating for an end to the war, redistribution of land to peasants, and worker control of factories. Their radical message resonated with disaffected segments of society, particularly urban workers and soldiers disillusioned with the Provisional Government's continuation of the war. Additionally, the Bolsheviks' organizational strength, disciplined party structure, and leadership under Vladimir Lenin enabled them to outmaneuver rival political factions and seize power in the October Revolution of 1917. Their ability to mobilize popular support through propaganda, agitation, and grassroots organizing was crucial in rallying the masses to their cause and undermining the authority of the Provisional Government. In my opinion, while the Bolsheviks' seizure of power was facilitated by specific historical circumstances and grievances, it is unlikely that power could have been attained in a significantly more peaceful manner given the deep-rooted divisions and conflicts within Russian society at the time. The breakdown of traditional institutions, widespread violence and unrest, and the polarizing effects of World War I and the February Revolution created a highly volatile and unstable environment in which peaceful political transition was difficult to achieve. Furthermore, the entrenched interests of ruling elites, reactionary forces, and foreign powers opposed to Bolshevik rule would likely have resisted any attempts at peaceful reform or negotiation, making armed struggle and revolution a more viable path to power for the Bolsheviks. While alternative scenarios are always possible in historical hindsight, the particular constellation of factors and dynamics in Russia during this period made the Bolshevik Revolution and the subsequent establishment of Soviet power a highly probable outcome. 76. Discuss the factors that led to the collapse of the Central Powers and the Allied victory in World War I. Which factor was to prove to be most decisive in the Allied victory? Answer: The collapse of the Central Powers and the Allied victory in World War I were influenced by a combination of military, economic, and political factors that shifted the balance of power in favor of the Allies. One key factor was the entry of the United States into the war in 1917, which provided the Allies with fresh troops, resources, and industrial capacity, tipping the balance of power in their favor. The United States' intervention helped to bolster Allied morale, strengthen their military capabilities, and offset the losses suffered by European powers after years of attrition and trench warfare. Additionally, the collapse of Russia following the Russian Revolution of 1917 freed up German forces from the Eastern Front, allowing them to concentrate their efforts on the Western Front. However, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in 1918, which ended the war between Germany and Russia, also deprived the Central Powers of vital resources and strategic advantages in the East, further weakening their position. Furthermore, internal unrest and political instability within the Central Powers, particularly in Germany and Austria-Hungary, undermined their ability to continue fighting and maintain civilian support for the war effort. Economic hardships, food shortages, and social discontent fueled anti-war sentiment and revolutionary movements, leading to internal collapse and the abdication of monarchs such as Kaiser Wilhelm II and Emperor Charles I. In my opinion, the entry of the United States into the war was the most decisive factor in the Allied victory, as it provided the Allies with a significant military, economic, and psychological advantage that helped to break the stalemate on the Western Front and turn the tide of the war in their favor. The United States' intervention not only bolstered Allied strength but also weakened the Central Powers' resolve and capacity to continue fighting, ultimately leading to their collapse and defeat. 77. Weigh the internal and external factors that led to the end of the Ottoman Empire. Which were ultimately the more important? Answer: The end of the Ottoman Empire was influenced by a combination of internal and external factors, including political, economic, social, and military developments, as well as pressures from foreign powers and nationalist movements. Internally, the Ottoman Empire faced challenges such as political decentralization, administrative inefficiency, and social unrest, exacerbated by economic stagnation, corruption, and ethnic and religious tensions. The empire's diverse population, comprising various ethnic and religious groups, contributed to internal divisions and conflicts over governance, identity, and autonomy. Externally, the Ottoman Empire came under increasing pressure from European powers, particularly during the 19th and early 20th centuries, as they sought to expand their influence and control over Ottoman territories. The decline of the Ottoman Empire was further accelerated by military defeats, territorial losses, and diplomatic humiliations, such as the Treaty of Sevres in 1920, which dismantled Ottoman territories and granted extensive concessions to foreign powers Nationalist movements within the empire, such as the Young Turks and Arab Revolt, also played a significant role in challenging Ottoman authority and demanding political reforms, autonomy, or independence. These movements capitalized on popular discontent with Ottoman rule and mobilized support for nationalist causes, contributing to the disintegration of the empire and the emergence of successor states. In weighing the internal and external factors that led to the end of the Ottoman Empire, it is difficult to determine which were ultimately more important, as they were interconnected and mutually reinforcing. However, external pressures and interventions by foreign powers, combined with internal weaknesses and divisions, were decisive in accelerating the empire's decline and facilitating its eventual collapse. Overall, while internal factors such as political instability and social unrest certainly contributed to the end of the Ottoman Empire, it was ultimately the combination of external pressures, military defeats, and nationalist movements that proved to be most significant in shaping the empire's fate and paving the way for its dissolution. 78. How did the peace settlement after World War I address the underlying causes of the war? Examine both the causes of the war and their corresponding solutions, and assess the likelihood of the solutions succeeding or failing. Answer: The peace settlement after World War I, particularly embodied in the Treaty of Versailles, attempted to address several underlying causes of the war, including territorial disputes, nationalism, militarism, and economic rivalries. However, the effectiveness of these solutions varied, and many of them ultimately failed to prevent future conflicts. 1. Territorial Disputes: - Cause: The war was triggered by territorial disputes, particularly in the Balkans, where competing nationalisms and imperial ambitions clashed. - Solution: The Treaty of Versailles redrew the map of Europe, dismantling empires such as the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires and creating new nation-states based on the principle of national self-determination. - Likelihood of Success: While the creation of new nation-states addressed some territorial grievances, it also created new sources of tension and conflict, particularly in regions with mixed ethnic populations and disputed territories. The redrawing of borders without regard for local demographics and historical grievances laid the groundwork for future conflicts. 2. Nationalism: - Cause: Nationalism, particularly the desire for self-determination and independence among ethnic groups, fueled tensions and rivalries within Europe. - Solution: The principle of national self-determination was enshrined in the peace settlement, allowing ethnic groups to form their own nation-states. - Likelihood of Success: While the principle of national self-determination was a progressive step towards addressing nationalist aspirations, its implementation was uneven and often arbitrary. Many ethnic minorities were left outside the borders of their newly created nation-states, leading to continued resentment and conflict. 3. Militarism: - Cause: The arms race and militarization of European powers contributed to the outbreak of war, as countries built up their military capabilities and pursued aggressive foreign policies. - Solution: The Treaty of Versailles imposed severe restrictions on Germany's military capabilities, including disarmament, demilitarization of the Rhineland, and limitations on the size of its army and navy. - Likelihood of Success: While the disarmament of Germany was intended to prevent future aggression and maintain peace, it also fueled resentment and grievances among the German population, contributing to the rise of militarism and nationalism in the interwar period. 4. Economic Rivalries: - Cause: Economic competition and rivalries, including trade disputes and colonial ambitions, exacerbated tensions between European powers. - Solution: The peace settlement attempted to address economic grievances through reparations payments and economic sanctions against Germany. - Likelihood of Success: The reparations payments imposed on Germany imposed a heavy economic burden and contributed to economic instability and resentment, ultimately undermining the stability of the post-war order and fueling nationalist sentiment. Overall, while the peace settlement after World War I made some attempts to address the underlying causes of the war, its effectiveness was limited by political, economic, and social factors. The failure to achieve lasting peace and stability after World War I paved the way for future conflicts, including World War II, highlighting the limitations of the peace settlement in addressing the root causes of war. 79. Refer to the passage “War Propaganda and the Movies: Charlie Chaplin.” Why was propaganda used in World War I? Who were the targets of propaganda? What were the advantages of using movies in the war effort? Answer: Propaganda was used in World War I as a means of shaping public opinion, mobilizing support for the war effort, and influencing attitudes towards the enemy. The targets of propaganda included both domestic populations and international audiences, with the aim of rallying support for the war among civilians, soldiers, and neutral countries. Propaganda was employed to demonize the enemy, portray them as barbaric and inhumane, and justify the righteousness of one's own cause. It sought to evoke strong emotions such as patriotism, nationalism, and hatred towards the enemy, encouraging enlistment, sacrifice, and support for the war effort. Movies played a significant role in the war effort by reaching mass audiences and conveying powerful messages through visual imagery and storytelling. The advantages of using movies in propaganda included their ability to evoke emotional responses, convey complex ideas and narratives, and reach diverse audiences across different social and cultural backgrounds. Charlie Chaplin's films, such as "The Great Dictator," utilized humor, satire, and visual storytelling to critique totalitarianism, fascism, and militarism, and promote the values of democracy, freedom, and human dignity. By using the medium of film to convey political messages, Chaplin and other filmmakers were able to engage and educate audiences in ways that were both entertaining and thought-provoking, contributing to the war effort and shaping public opinion. Overall, propaganda was a powerful tool used in World War I to manipulate perceptions, mobilize support, and influence attitudes towards the war and the enemy. Movies played a crucial role in this propaganda effort by reaching mass audiences and conveying persuasive messages through visual storytelling and emotional appeal. 80. How did the Versailles peace treaties set the basis for future conflicts in both Europe and the colonial world? Constructively critique the Treaty of Versailles. If the treaty had been written differently, do you think World War II could have been avoided? Explain. Answer: The Versailles peace treaties, particularly the Treaty of Versailles, set the basis for future conflicts in both Europe and the colonial world by imposing punitive measures on Germany, redrawing borders, and creating new geopolitical tensions and grievances. 1. Punitive Measures on Germany: - The Treaty of Versailles imposed harsh reparations payments on Germany, blamed it for starting the war, and severely restricted its military capabilities. These punitive measures fueled resentment and grievances among the German population, contributing to economic instability, political unrest, and the rise of militarism and nationalism in the interwar period. 2. Redrawing Borders: - The redrawing of borders and creation of new nation-states in Europe, particularly in Eastern Europe and the Balkans, created ethnic and territorial disputes that fueled nationalist tensions and conflicts. The arbitrary nature of border changes and disregard for local demographics and historical grievances laid the groundwork for future territorial disputes and wars. 3. Colonial World: - The Versailles peace treaties also reshaped the colonial world by transferring territories from defeated powers to victorious ones, creating new mandates and spheres of influence. The imposition of colonial rule and exploitation by European powers further fueled nationalist movements and anti-colonial resistance, leading to conflicts and struggles for independence in the interwar and post-war periods. Constructive Critique of the Treaty of Versailles: - The Treaty of Versailles was criticized for its punitive approach towards Germany, which contributed to economic hardship, political instability, and resentment, ultimately undermining the stability of the post-war order and fueling nationalist sentiment The failure to address the underlying causes of the war, such as imperialism, militarism, and nationalism, also limited the effectiveness of the treaty in preventing future conflicts. If the treaty had been written differently, with a more balanced and equitable approach towards all parties involved, it is possible that World War II could have been avoided or mitigated. A less punitive approach towards Germany, combined with efforts to address the root causes of war and promote reconciliation and cooperation among European powers, may have created a more stable and peaceful post-war order. Overall, while the Versailles peace treaties attempted to address the consequences of World War I, their limitations and shortcomings set the stage for future conflicts and tensions in both Europe and the colonial world. A more constructive and inclusive approach to peace-building and diplomacy may have helped to prevent the outbreak of World War II and promote long-term stability and cooperation among nations. Test Bank for The Western Heritage : Combined Volume Donald M. Kagan, Steven Ozment, Frank M. Turner, Alison Frank, Gregory Francis Viggiano 9780205896318, 9780134104102

Document Details

Related Documents

Close

Send listing report

highlight_off

You already reported this listing

The report is private and won't be shared with the owner

rotate_right
Close
rotate_right
Close

Send Message

image
Close

My favorites

image
Close

Application Form

image
Notifications visibility rotate_right Clear all Close close
image
image
arrow_left
arrow_right